Mr. Rohit Joshi, Adv. along with v. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ANR

$~34 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ CRL.M.C. 1234/2025 & CRL.M.A. 5490/2025 JITENDAR KUMAR & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Rohit Joshi, Adv. along with petitioners versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for State with SI Geetam Singh, PS Badarpur R-2 in person (through VC) CORAM:tHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAULO R D E R% 18.09.20251.The instant petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter “BNSS”) [earlier Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter “CrPC.”)] has been filed on behalf of the petitioners praying for the quashing of FIR bearing no. 350/2023, registered at Police Station – Badarpur, for the offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter “IPC”). 2.The brief facts concerning the present dispute are that the marriage between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 was solemnized on 12.12.2021, according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. However, due to some temperamental differences between them, shortly after their marriage, they started living separately. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/09/2025 at 12:02:11

3.Despite efforts of reconciliation, both the parties could not settle their differences, pursuant to which respondent no. 2 got FIR no. 350/2023 registered. 4.However, at this stage, with the intervention of family members and relatives, both the parties have entered into settlement and their statements have been duly recorded before the Registrar on 02.09.2025. The petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2, who appear in person, submit that they are living together. Respondent no. 2 further submits that she does not want to pursue the present FIR. 5.It is, thus, prayed that the instant FIR be quashed on the basis of oral settlement between the parties. 6.Heard. Issue notice. 7.Learned APP for the State, who appears on advance notice, accepts notice and submits that there is no opposition to the prayer made on behalf of the petitioners seeking quashing of the FIR in question in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties. 8.Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 9.The instant criminal proceedings concern non-compoundable offences that are private in nature and do not have a serious impact on society, especially considering that there is a settlement/compromise between the victim and the accused. 10.In such cases, it is settled law that High Court is also required to consider the conduct and antecedents of the accused in order to ascertain that the settlement has been entered into by her own free will and has not been imposed upon her by the petitioners or any person related to them. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/09/2025 at 12:02:11

11.In the case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan and Ors., (2019) 5 SCC 688, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the powers conferred under Section 482 of the CrPC/Section 528 of the BNSS, can be exercised by the Courts to quash criminal proceedings featuring non-compoundable offences, when the matter arises out of matrimonial or family disputes. Moreover, it is pertinent to satisfy the Court that the said non-compoundable offences are private in nature and do not have a serious impact on society. 12.Furthermore, it was observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramgopal and Ors. Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021 INSC 568, that the extraordinary power enjoined upon the High Courts under Section 482 of the CrPC/Section 528 of the BNSS can be invoked even when such a case falls within the ambit of non-compoundable offences, given that the Court is satisfied that the nature of the offence does not impact the conscience of society, and that the compromise between the parties is voluntary and amicable. 13.The petitioners are present before this Court and have been identified by their counsel and the Investigating Officer, Police Station - Badarpur. Respondent no. 2 is also present in the Court and has been identified by her counsel and the concerned Investigating Officer. 14.In the present case, the complainant/respondent no. 2 is present in Court and has categorically stated that she has entered into compromise and settled the entirety of disputes with the petitioners amicably and of her own free will, without any pressure or coercion. There is also no allegation from respondent no.2 that the conduct and antecedents of petitioners have been bad towards her after entering into this compromise. Further, she submits This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/09/2025 at 12:02:11 that she has no objection to the present FIR being quashed and she does not wish to pursue the FIR any further as she is now residing with petitioner no. 1. 15.It is also notes that the present petition was initially filed for quashing of FIR on merits and not compromise. However, the parties had made statement before this Court that they are willing to amicably settle their disputes. Accordingly, their statements were recorded before the Joint Registrar (Judicial) on 02.09.2025 where respondent no. 2 has specifically stated that they have arrived at a settlement without undue pressure and that she is now living with petitioner no. 1 since 09.03.2025. 16.Therefore, in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties and the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the present petition is allowed. Accordingly, FIR no. 350/2023, registered at Police Station – Badarpur, for offences punishable under Sections 498A/406/34 of the IPC, and all the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom stand quashed qua the present petitioners. 17.The petition, along-with pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. AJAY DIGPAUL, JSEPTEMBER 18, 2025/ar/ryp